Progressions - a different approach

[kav]

Hi,

Maybe I should post this in "Money Management" but since I offer it not as a complete solution, but just as a new way of approaching progressions, I'll post it here.

You play say a double street with a progression.
And the double street doesn't hit for quite some time.
And the progression gets scary...

Wait a moment. You are actually chasing 6 numbers (double street). What if instead of using a double street progression, you followed the 6 numbers separately and used 6 distinctive one number progressions!? The progression then would be much softer and much less scary, yet still able to offer a profit.

Food for thought.

Kav

[rjeaton1]

At first glance it appears as though what you've said above would be true...unfortunately, you actually end up betting more to get to the same place...not less.

Let me explain:

A street bet pays out at 5 to 1, so you can bet a double-street 6 times (as long as you win on the six time) and you break even.

So, lets say your progression for a double street looks like this:

1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2 and you lose all of these bets for a total loss of 12 units.

Now, here is what your progression would look like using an individual progression on each of the six numbers in that double-street:

1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2...except you have to have each of those numbers on every number on the double street...so if you lose all the steps of this progression again, instead of losing 12 units, you've lost 72 units.

Unfortunately, the roulette layouts payouts were set up to make it so that you can't do what it is you've explained in any way anywhere on the layout.

[rjeaton1]

Granted, if you win the first step of the progression betting on the double street itself, you profit 5 units, whereas if you won the first step of the progression betting all 6 numbers of the double street with their own individual progressions you'd win 30 units.

But, you could win those same 30 units by simply betting 6 units on the double street itself instead of on unit on the six numbers of the double street.

Either way, it all works out the same.

[kav]

et me explain:

So, lets say your progression for a double street looks like this:
1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2 and you lose all of these bets for a total loss of 12 units.

Now, here is what your progression would look like using an individual progression on each of the six numbers in that double-street:

1,1,1,1,1,1,2,2,2...except you have to have each of those numbers on every number on the double street...so if you lose all the steps of this progression again, instead of losing 12 units, you've lost 72 units.

Nope.

First of all let the betting units not confuse you in the broader concept thinking.
The analogy is that you start betting 6 units on double street and instead you bet 1 unit on each number.

Secondly, while the progression on the double street would be something like:
6,6,6,6,6,7,7,7,8 etc...
the betting on the single number would be a progression for a single number meaning for each number we have a separate progression like:
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 ... (after 34 spins we go...) 2,2,2, etc...

Is it more clear now? Do you see the difference now? Is it something that intrigued you to pursue further? That's the point of this post.

I'm not offering solutions. I'm offering ideas, approaches to things. In this post for example, you could say that I point out that there are different ways to chase the same numbers. Note that I didn't even say one way is better than the other. Each way has advantages and disadvantages. Fist one should understand and analyze the progressions and then use according to his strategy. But it seems to soon to go to that.

When presented with ideas, it is better find a way to elaborate on them than to find a way to dismiss them.

Thank you for your reply.

[rjeaton1]

Secondly, while the progression on the double street would be something like:
6,6,6,6,6,7,7,7,8 etc...
the betting on the single number would be a progression for a single number meaning for each number we have a separate progression like:
1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1 ... (after 34 spins we go...) 2,2,2, etc...

I'm afraid I still don't follow.  If you were to bet one unit on each number of the six numbers in the double street for 34 spins, you'd be down 204 units.

In fact, any win after spin 6 would cause you to take a loss.

When presented with ideas, it is better find a way to elaborate on them than to find a way to dismiss them.

I can assure you, I'm not being dismissive.  I'm actually trying to offer input.  But I'm afraid my input won't be of much use until I understand exactly what it is you're trying to say. 

If it takes me a bit to get on the same page as you, please don't be offended.  Sometimes I can be quite dense, haha.

[kav]

No problem rjeaton,
thanks again for this discussion.

In the 6 different number approach...
Yes, like you say, any win after spin 6 would not produce profit. But I wont stop there. I see them as 6 parallel 1-number progressions. One of them has hit (producing profit for the specific number). But the other 5 have not hit yet. So I continue their progressions. Also I start again the progression for the number that hit. I bet 6 numbers all the time. Each of them may be in a different stage of its separate progression.

But please do not see my post as a complete system. Just food for though. A discussion starter.
EVERY approach has advantages and disadvantages. That's one of the biggest truths about roulette. But first, we should identify, understand deeply and analyze these different approaches.

That's a first step.
Here to help with further questions.

[rjeaton1]

In the 6 different number approach...
Yes, like you say, any win after spin 6 would not produce profit. But I wont stop there. I see them as 6 parallel 1-number progressions. One of them has hit (producing profit for the specific number). But the other 5 have not hit yet. So I continue their progressions. Also I start again the progression for the number that hit. I bet 6 numbers all the time. Each of them may be in a different stage of its separate progression.

Ahhhh, okay.  That makes sense (just takes me some time sometimes, haha).

Here is a bit of coding that does what you've said.  It only bets on the first double street as you haven't mentioned any sort of bet selection as of now.  But at least this way you can see how your idea works.

Code Select Expand

system "individual progressions"

method "main"
begin
while starting a new session
begin
call "initialize"
end

while on each spin
begin
track last number for 1 time to record "tracked numbers" layout
call "check hit number"
call "place bets"
end
end

method "check hit number"
begin
Put 1 on record "tracked numbers" layout index
Loop until record "tracked numbers" layout index > record "tracked numbers" layout count
begin
Put 1 on record "numbers" layout index
Loop until record "numbers" layout index > record "numbers" layout count
begin
If record "tracked numbers" layout is not = record "numbers" layout
begin
Put 100% of record "numbers" layout index to record "numbers" data index
Add 1 to record "numbers" data
if record "numbers" data > 107
begin
put 1 to record "numbers" data
end
end
If record "tracked numbers" layout = record "numbers" layout
begin
Put 100% of record "numbers" layout index to record "numbers" data index
put 1 to record "numbers" data
end
Add 1 to record "numbers" layout index
end
Add 1 to record "tracked numbers" layout index
end
End

method "place bets"
begin
put 1 on record "numbers" data index
loop until record "numbers" data index > 6
begin
clear record "bet number" layout
put 100% of record "numbers" data index to record "numbers" layout index
copy record "numbers" layout to record "bet number" layout
put 100% of record "numbers" data to record "progression" data index
put 100% of record "progression" data to record "bet number" layout
add 1 to record "numbers" data index
end
end


method "initialize"
begin
Copy List [1,2,3,4,5,6]
to record "numbers" layout

set list [0,0,0,0,0,0] to record "numbers" data

set list [1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
          1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,1,
          1,1,1,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,2,
          2,2,2,2,2,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,3,
          3,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,4,5,5,5,5,5,5,
          5,6,6,6,6,6,6,7,7,7,7,7,8,8,8,8,
          9,9,9,9,10,10,10,10,11,11,11] to record "progression" data
end
         

[Lanky]

Hi RJ

A street bet pays out at 5 to 1

My Mate I think You meant to say that the Line Bet which equals 2 double Streets Payout is 5/1.

Because the Street Bet Pays 11/1.

I am just pointing it out Cobber thats all.....its just a post Typo thats all Mate.

Lanky.

[bombus]

you haven't mentioned any sort of bet selection as of now.

That's right.

So it's either a progression for a six line, or a progression for six straight ups.

If you can afford it, you should start with the six line, then extend with the streets, then extend with the splits, and then extend with the straight ups. Very expensive, and a lot of work, but it could be profitable.

[kav]

If you can afford it, you should start with the six line, then extend with the streets, then extend with the splits, and then extend with the straight ups. Very expensive, and a lot of work, but it could be profitable.

That's an idea.
And this is why I posted it on Brainstorming. To hear thoughts and may cooperatively develop something based on this observation. (that set of number can finaly be divided to its distinctive numbers, which makes progressions (longer and less profitable perhaps, but also...) much more durable and safe.

Let's say it's a system under construction. And whoever has a thought to contribute is welcome.

About your interesting idea:
At the start my intention was not to compare monetarily the two bets. 1 unit on street versus 6 units on separate numbers. I was focusing more to the progression differences. I mean, even if we started with a) 6 units on a street and B) 6 units straight up, the would be very different progressions for those different bets.

Now, you bombus and rjeaton1 (in his way ) have mentioned the additional idea of integrating those two approaches in order to gain "cheap" progression steps. Truly interesting.  Under consideration.

The question that arises is how would that progression evolve if numbers started to appear? Imagine you are at the streets phase and one number hits. After another 10 spins another one hits.  etc. how whould it develop. When do we go from streets to splits and from splits to straight ups?

( 

[Mr J]

Did'em both already, you name it, I probably did it. If I remember (it was a couple years ago), I did WAIT until I had the furthest back unhit double street. It had to meet a min. requirement, that I dont recall. Lets say it was the 31 32 33 34 35 36. I would run a LONG progression on EACH number.

On a hit, start over fresh. Lets say the 32 hit and I now look back etc. (all numbers written down). The next unhit DS is the 7 8 9 10 11 12. The 8 SPOT starts over in the progression, starting fresh. The rest of the numbers pick up where I left off in the progression.

Anyways, the idea lasted a while, then lost, lost, lost, lost etc. I kicked it to the side, never did it again. The other method.......(it was a BI**H doing ths progression) I started out betting on ANY even bet, (min. at $10)  Even.....dozens...double street....quad....street....split....single number.

NOTE: Make sure all of your bets are in the SAME dozens section. EXAMPLE: 1-12....7-12.....7 8 10 11......7 8......8. This is only my opinion folks! This method did last longer, had ok results.  Ken

[kav]

Hi Mr J,

I had no doubt you have tried something along these (no pun intended) lines.

The fundamental difference to what I propose and to what you did is that you stopped following the specific number after the first hit. It is important to follow the same number because only so can you capitalize on the fact that it has slept so far. What you did was to always back up the 6 sleepers, what I say is something different.

[kav]

-